Antidepressants and benzodiazepines for panic disorder in adults

Brain Mechanisms Underlying Panic Attack and Panic Disorder

Panic disorder is a psychiatric disorder characterized by recurrent panic attacks, with a prevalence of ~ 4% in the general population, causing heavy personal and socioeconomic burdens. The similarities of animal defense responses to clinical panic attack symptoms in humans make it possible to translate neuroanatomical pathways identified in animal studies to panic disorder in humans. Therefore, in this review we first present a basic overview of panic disorder in humans including the main subtypes, models commonly used to trigger panic attacks, related hypotheses, the neurotransmitter systems that may be involved, and the current clinical treatments to give the reader a comprehensive understanding of panic disorder. The animal section introduces the models that trigger panic-like behavior in animals and the brain regions that may be involved, providing insights for future elucidation of the neural circuit mechanisms behind panic attacks.

Minor tranquillizers for short-term treatment of newly onset symptoms of anxiety and distress: a systematic review with network meta-analysis of randomized trials

Unspecific symptoms of anxiety and distress are frequently encountered in patients in both general practice and acute psychiatric services. Minor tranquillizers may be a treatment option when non-pharmacological interventions are insufficient or unavailable. We conducted a systematic review with network meta-analysis of the evidence for short-term (1-4 weeks) pharmacological treatment of newly onset symptoms of anxiety and distress. We searched the PsycInfo, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library databases and extracted data following a predefined hierarchy of outcomes. We assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the certainty of the evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation framework (GRADE). We included 34 randomized trials comprising a total of 7044 patients with adjustment disorders or anxiety spectrum disorders. The network meta-analysis showed that regarding the critical outcome symptoms of anxiety within 1-4 weeks benzodiazepines (SMD - 0.58, 95% CI - 0.77 to - 0.40), quetiapine (SMD - 0.51, 95% CI - 0.90 to - 0.13) and pregabalin (SMD - 0.58, 95% CI - 0.87 to - 0.28) all performed better than placebo with no statistically significant difference between the drugs. Data on other important outcomes were inconsistently reported. Adverse effects varied, but overall, it was uncertain whether adverse effects differed between interventions. The evidence regarding the risk of dependence was uncertain, but dependence may be a concern in susceptible individuals even with short-term treatment. Overall, the certainty of the evidence according to GRADE was rated as low to very low across outcomes. Despite the limitations in the evidence, the results of this review can inform treatment guidelines, supporting clinicians in the choice of minor tranquillizer in this prevalent and help-seeking, clinically heterogeneous population.

Pharmacological treatments in panic disorder in adults: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A panic attack is a discrete period of fear or anxiety that has a rapid onset and reaches a peak within 10 minutes. The main symptoms involve bodily systems, such as racing heart, chest pain, sweating, shaking, dizziness, flushing, churning stomach, faintness and breathlessness. Other recognised panic attack symptoms involve fearful cognitions, such as the fear of collapse, going mad or dying, and derealisation (the sensation that the world is unreal). Panic disorder is common in the general population with a prevalence of 1% to 4%. The treatment of panic disorder includes psychological and pharmacological interventions, including antidepressants and benzodiazepines.

OBJECTIVES

To compare, via network meta-analysis, individual drugs (antidepressants and benzodiazepines) or placebo in terms of efficacy and acceptability in the acute treatment of panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia. To rank individual active drugs for panic disorder (antidepressants, benzodiazepines and placebo) according to their effectiveness and acceptability. To rank drug classes for panic disorder (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs), mono-amine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and benzodiazepines (BDZs) and placebo) according to their effectiveness and acceptability. To explore heterogeneity and inconsistency between direct and indirect evidence in a network meta-analysis.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialised Register, CENTRAL, CDSR, MEDLINE, Ovid Embase and PsycINFO to 26 May 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of people aged 18 years or older of either sex and any ethnicity with clinically diagnosed panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia. We included trials that compared the effectiveness of antidepressants and benzodiazepines with each other or with a placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened titles/abstracts and full texts, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We analysed dichotomous data and continuous data as risk ratios (RRs), mean differences (MD) or standardised mean differences (SMD): response to treatment (i.e. substantial improvement from baseline as defined by the original investigators: dichotomous outcome), total number of dropouts due to any reason (as a proxy measure of treatment acceptability: dichotomous outcome), remission (i.e. satisfactory end state as defined by global judgement of the original investigators: dichotomous outcome), panic symptom scales and global judgement (continuous outcome), frequency of panic attacks (as recorded, for example, by a panic diary; continuous outcome), agoraphobia (dichotomous outcome). We assessed the certainty of evidence using threshold analyses.

MAIN RESULTS

Overall, we included 70 trials in this review. Sample sizes ranged between 5 and 445 participants in each arm, and the total sample size per study ranged from 10 to 1168. Thirty-five studies included sample sizes of over 100 participants. There is evidence from 48 RCTs (N = 10,118) that most medications are more effective in the response outcome than placebo. In particular, diazepam, alprazolam, clonazepam, paroxetine, venlafaxine, clomipramine, fluoxetine and adinazolam showed the strongest effect, with diazepam, alprazolam and clonazepam ranking as the most effective. We found heterogeneity in most of the comparisons, but our threshold analyses suggest that this is unlikely to impact the findings of the network meta-analysis. Results from 64 RCTs (N = 12,310) suggest that most medications are associated with either a reduced or similar risk of dropouts to placebo. Alprazolam and diazepam were associated with a lower dropout rate compared to placebo and were ranked as the most tolerated of all the medications examined. Thirty-two RCTs (N = 8569) were included in the remission outcome. Most medications were more effective than placebo, namely desipramine, fluoxetine, clonazepam, diazepam, fluvoxamine, imipramine, venlafaxine and paroxetine, and their effects were clinically meaningful. Amongst these medications, desipramine and alprazolam were ranked highest. Thirty-five RCTs (N = 8826) are included in the continuous outcome reduction in panic scale scores. Brofaromine, clonazepam and reboxetine had the strongest reductions in panic symptoms compared to placebo, but results were based on either one trial or very small trials. Forty-one RCTs (N = 7853) are included in the frequency of panic attack outcome. Only clonazepam and alprazolam showed a strong reduction in the frequency of panic attacks compared to placebo, and were ranked highest. Twenty-six RCTs (N = 7044) provided data for agoraphobia. The strongest reductions in agoraphobia symptoms were found for citalopram, reboxetine, escitalopram, clomipramine and diazepam, compared to placebo. For the pooled intervention classes, we examined the two primary outcomes (response and dropout). The classes of medication were: SSRIs, SNRIs, TCAs, MAOIs and BDZs. For the response outcome, all classes of medications examined were more effective than placebo. TCAs as a class ranked as the most effective, followed by BDZs and MAOIs. SSRIs as a class ranked fifth on average, while SNRIs were ranked lowest. When we compared classes of medication with each other for the response outcome, we found no difference between classes. Comparisons between MAOIs and TCAs and between BDZs and TCAs also suggested no differences between these medications, but the results were imprecise. For the dropout outcome, BDZs were the only class associated with a lower dropout compared to placebo and were ranked first in terms of tolerability. The other classes did not show any difference in dropouts compared to placebo. In terms of ranking, TCAs are on average second to BDZs, followed by SNRIs, then by SSRIs and lastly by MAOIs. BDZs were associated with lower dropout rates compared to SSRIs, SNRIs and TCAs. The quality of the studies comparing antidepressants with placebo was moderate, while the quality of the studies comparing BDZs with placebo and antidepressants was low.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In terms of efficacy, SSRIs, SNRIs (venlafaxine), TCAs, MAOIs and BDZs may be effective, with little difference between classes. However, it is important to note that the reliability of these findings may be limited due to the overall low quality of the studies, with all having unclear or high risk of bias across multiple domains. Within classes, some differences emerged. For example, amongst the SSRIs paroxetine and fluoxetine seem to have stronger evidence of efficacy than sertraline. Benzodiazepines appear to have a small but significant advantage in terms of tolerability (incidence of dropouts) over other classes.

An Updated Analysis of Psychotropic Medicine Utilisation in Older People in New Zealand from 2005 to 2019

BACKGROUND

Psychotropic medicine utilisation in older adults continues to be of interest because of overuse and concerns surrounding its safety and efficacy.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to characterise the utilisation of psychotropic medicines in older people in New Zealand.

METHODS

We conducted a repeated cross-sectional analysis of national dispensing data from 1 January, 2005 to 31 December, 2019. We defined utilisation using the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification defined daily dose system. Utilisation was measured in terms of the defined daily dose (DDD) per 1000 older people per day (TOPD).

RESULTS

Overall, the utilisation of psychotropic medicines increased marginally by 0.42% between 2005 and 2019. The utilisation increased for antidepressants (72.42 to 75.21 DDD/TOPD) and antipsychotics (6.06-19.04 DDD/TOPD). In contrast, the utilisation of hypnotics and sedatives (53.74-38.90 DDD/TOPD) and anxiolytics decreased (10.20-9.87 DDD/TOPD). The utilisation of atypical antipsychotics increased (4.06-18.72 DDD/TOPD), with the highest percentage change in DDD/TOPD contributed by olanzapine (520.6 %). In comparison, utilisation of typical antipsychotics was relatively stable (2.00-2.06 DDD/TOPD). The utilisation of venlafaxine increased remarkably by 5.7 times between 2005 and 2019. The utilisation of zopiclone was far greater than that of other hypnotics in 2019.

CONCLUSIONS

There was only a marginal increase in psychotropic medicines utilisation from 2005 to 2019 in older adults in New Zealand. There was a five-fold increase in the utilisation of antipsychotic medicines. Continued monitoring of psychotropic medicine utilisation will be of interest to understand the utilisation of antidepressants and antipsychotic medicines during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic year.

Drug treatment for panic disorder with or without agoraphobia: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To identify drug classes and individual selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) with high rates of remission and low risk of adverse events in the treatment of panic disorder with or without agoraphobia.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Embase, Medline, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to 17 June 2021.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION

Randomised controlled trials that included adults aged ≥18 years with a diagnosis of panic disorder, compared drugs used to treat the panic disorder, and measured the outcomes of interest, including remissions, dropouts, and adverse events.

METHODS

Risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised trials. Direct meta-analyses were performed using random effects models. A two stage network meta-analysis with surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) was used to estimate the comparative efficacy of drug classes and individual SSRIs.

RESULTS

87 studies including a total of 12 800 participants and 12 drug classes were eligible for inclusion. Almost all the studies (86/87) had some concern or were at high risk of bias. Network meta-analysis of remission with consistent results indicated that tricyclic antidepressants, benzodiazepines, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, SSRIs, and serotonin-noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) were associated with significantly higher remission rates than placebo, with risk ratios of 1.39 (95% confidence interval 1.26 to 1.54), 1.47 (1.36 to 1.60), 1.30 (1.00 to 1.69), 1.38 (1.26 to 1.50), and 1.27 (1.12 to 1.45), respectively. SUCRAs identified benzodiazepines (84.5%, mean rank=2.4), tricyclic antidepressants (68.7%, 3.8), and SSRIs (66.4%, 4.0) as the top three best treatments for remission. However, tricyclic antidepressants, benzodiazepines, and SSRIs were also significantly associated with increased risk of adverse events compared with placebo, with risk ratios of 1.79 (1.47 to 2.19), 1.76 (1.50 to 2.06), and 1.19 (1.01 to 1.41), respectively. Consistency assumption of adverse events was upheld but could still be present on removal of studies with high percentages of women participants and those with agoraphobia. A SUCRA cluster ranking plot considering both remission and adverse events among all drug classes indicated that SSRIs were associated with high remission and low risk of adverse events. Among individual SSRIs, sertraline and escitalopram provided high remission with an acceptable risk of adverse events.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that SSRIs provide high rates of remission with low risk of adverse events for the treatment of panic disorder. Among SSRIs, sertraline and escitalopram were associated with high remission and low risk of adverse events. The findings were, however, based on studies of moderate to very low certainty levels of evidence, mostly as a result of within study bias, inconsistency, and imprecision of the findings reported.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42020180638.

Immunomodulatory Role of CB2 Receptors in Emotional and Cognitive Disorders

Emotional behavior, memory, and learning have been associated with alterations in the immune system in neuropsychiatric and neurodegenerative diseases. In recent years, several studies pointed out the involvement of the cannabinoid receptor 2 (CB2r) in the immune system and the regulation of inflammation. This receptor is widely distributed in different tissues and organs with higher expression in spleen and immune system cells. However, CB2r has also been detected in several brain areas and different brain cell types, such as neurons and glia. These findings suggest that CB2r may closely relate the immune system and the brain circuits regulating inflammation, mood, and cognitive functions. Therefore, we review the studies that may help elucidate the molecular bases of CB2r in regulating inflammation in different brain cells and its role in the pathophysiology of psychiatric and neurodegenerative disorders.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of antidepressants and benzodiazepines for the treatment of panic disorder: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aims to assess the efficacy and acceptability of the different types of antidepressants and benzodiazepines for the treatment of panic disorder (PD) in adult patients.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published between 1995 and 2020 on the use of antidepressants and benzodiazepines for the treatment of PD. A systematic review and network meta-analysis were performed.

RESULTS

42 RCTs were included in the network meta-analysis, with a comparison of 11 interventions.Escitalopram (odds ratios OR 1.52, 95 % credible interval CI 1.09-2.10), venlafaxine (OR 1.33, 95 % CI 1.16-1.51) and benzodiazepines (OR 1.50, 95 % CI 1.29-1.75) had greater efficacy and acceptability than the placebo. Imipramine(OR 1.43, 95 % CI 1.15-1.79) was also demonstrated to be efficacious and tolerated but the results were restricted to small sample size. Moreover, paroxetine, sertraline, fluoxetine, citalopram and clomipramine (OR 1.37, 1.36, 1.45, 1.33 and 1.36, respectively) were more efficacious, although the acceptability of paroxetine and sertraline were significantly less tolerated than benzodiazepines. Notably, the efficacy of reboxetine and fluvoxamine were merely as equal as that of the placebo.

OUTCOMES

This is the first systematic review of antidepressants and benzodiazepines for the treatment of PD to use a network analysis. Escitalopram and venlafaxine as well as benzodiazepines may be effective choices as treatments for PD with relatively good acceptability, which still needs to be confirmed byhigh-quality RCTs.

Benzodiazepine Prescribing in People with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Clinical Considerations

Benzodiazepines, available clinically for almost six decades, are still one of the most widely prescribed classes of medication. The proportion of the population prescribed benzodiazepines increases with age, and harms also increase with age. The prevalence of prescribing in people > 85 years of age is as high as one in three, including in people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The prevalence of COPD also increases with age. In COPD, indications cited for prescribing a benzodiazepine include anxiety, sleep disorders, or chronic breathlessness. Each of these symptoms is prevalent in the population with COPD, especially later in the course of the illness. For anxiety and insomnia, there is evidence to support short-term use, with little robust evidence to support prescribing for the symptomatic reduction of chronic breathlessness. People prescribed benzodiazepines are more likely to experience drowsiness or somnolence, exacerbations of their COPD, and respiratory tract infections. Furthermore, the longer people take benzodiazepines, the more likely they will become dependent on them. Prescribing patterns vary internationally but prescriptions of longer-acting benzodiazepines are declining in favour of shorter-acting compounds. Other evidence-based therapies that can more safely treat these problematic symptoms are available. For people already taking benzodiazepines, there are a number of interventions that have been shown to reduce the rate of prescribing. For people with COPD and not taking a benzodiazepine, but with symptoms where there is evidence of benefit, clinicians should weigh carefully the potential net benefit and prescribe at the lowest dose for the briefest time possible.

Pharmacological Therapy in Panic Disorder: Current Guidelines and Novel Drugs Discovery for Treatment-resistant Patient

Panic disorder (PD) being one of the most intensively investigated anxiety disorders is considered a heterogeneous psychiatric disease which has difficulties with early diagnosis. The disorder is recurrent and usually associated with low remission rates and high rates of relapse which may exacerbated social and quality of life, causes unnecessary cost and increased risk for complication and suicide. Current pharmacotherapy for PD are available but these drugs have slow therapeutic onset, several side effects and most patients do not fully respond to these standard pharmacological treatments. Ongoing investigations indicate the need for new and promising agents for the treatment of PD. This article will cover the importance of immediate and proper treatment, the gap in the current management of PD with special emphasis on pharmacotherapy, and evidence regarding the novel anti-panic drugs including the drugs in developments such as metabotropic glutamate (mGlu 2/3) agonist and levetiracetam. Preliminary results suggest the anti-panic properties and the efficacy of duloxetine, reboxetine, mirtazapine, nefazodone, risperidone and inositol as a monotherapy drug. Apart for their effectiveness, the aforementioned compounds were generally well tolerated compared to the standard available pharmacotherapy drugs, indicating their potential therapeutic usefulness for ambivalent and hypervigilance patient. Further strong clinical trials will provide an ample support to these novel compounds as an alternative monotherapy for PD treatment-resistant patient.

Benzodiazepines versus placebo for panic disorder in adults

BACKGROUND

Panic disorder is characterised by recurrent unexpected panic attacks consisting of a wave of intense fear that reaches a peak within a few minutes. Panic disorder is a common disorder, with an estimated lifetime prevalence of 1% to 5% in the general population and a 7% to 10% prevalence in primary care settings. Its aetiology is not fully understood and is probably heterogeneous.Panic disorder is treated with psychological and pharmacological interventions, often used in combination. Although benzodiazepines are frequently used in the treatment of panic disorder, guidelines recommend antidepressants, mainly selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), as first-line treatment for panic disorder, particularly due to their lower incidence of dependence and withdrawal reaction when compared to benzodiazepines. Despite these recommendations, benzodiazepines are widely used in the treatment of panic disorder, probably because of their rapid onset of action.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and acceptability of benzodiazepines versus placebo in the treatment of panic disorder with or without agoraphobia in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Controlled Trials Register (CCMDCTR Studies and References), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1950-), Embase (1974-), and PsycINFO (1967-) up to 29 May 2018. We handsearched reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews. We contacted experts in the field for supplemental data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All double-blind (blinding of patients and personnel) controlled trials randomising adults with panic disorder with or without agoraphobia to benzodiazepine or placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently checked the eligibility of studies and extracted data using a standardised form. Data were then entered data into Review Manager 5 using a double-check procedure. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details, settings, and outcome measures in terms of efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 24 studies in the review with a total of 4233 participants, of which 2124 were randomised to benzodiazepines and 1475 to placebo. The remaining 634 participants were randomised to other active treatments in three-arm trials. We assessed the overall methodological quality of the included studies as poor. We rated all studies as at unclear risk of bias in at least three domains. In addition, we judged 20 of the 24 included studies as having a high risk of bias in at least one domain.Two primary outcomes of efficacy and acceptability showed a possible advantage of benzodiazepines over placebo. The estimated risk ratio (RR) for a response to treatment was 1.65 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.39 to 1.96) in favour of benzodiazepines, which corresponds to an estimated number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 4 (95% CI 3 to 7). The dropout rate was lower among participants treated with benzodiazepines (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.64); the estimated NNTB was 6 (95% CI 5 to 9). We rated the quality of the evidence as low for both primary outcomes. The possible advantage of benzodiazepine was also seen for remission (RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.38 to 1.88) and the endpoint data for social functioning (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.53, 95% CI -0.65 to -0.42), both with low-quality evidence. We assessed the evidence for the other secondary outcomes as of very low quality. With the exception of the analyses of the change score data for depression (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.48 to 0.04) and social functioning (SMD -0.32, 95% CI -0.88 to 0.24), all secondary outcome analyses showed an effect in favour of benzodiazepines compared to placebo. However, the number of dropouts due to adverse effects was higher with benzodiazepines than with placebo (RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.15; low-quality evidence). Furthermore, our analyses of adverse events showed that a higher proportion of participants experienced at least one adverse effect when treated with benzodiazepines (RR 1.18, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.37; low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low-quality evidence shows a possible superiority of benzodiazepine over placebo in the short-term treatment of panic disorders. The validity of the included studies is questionable due to possible unmasking of allocated treatments, high dropout rates, and probable publication bias. Moreover, the included studies were only short-term studies and did not examine the long-term efficacy nor the risks of dependency and withdrawal symptoms. Due to these limitations, our results regarding the efficacy of benzodiazepines versus placebo provide only limited guidance for clinical practice. Furthermore, the clinician's choice is not between benzodiazepines and placebo, but between benzodiazepines and other agents, notably SSRIs, both in terms of efficacy and adverse effects. The choice of treatment should therefore be guided by the patient's preference and should balance benefits and harms from treatment in a long-term perspective.

Pharmacological and Neuromodulatory Treatments for Panic Disorder: Clinical Trials from 2010 to 2018

OBJECTIVE

Treatment for panic disorder (PD) have evolved, although there is still a strong unmet need for more effective and tolerable options. The present study summarizes and discusses recent evidence regarding the pharmacological and neuromodulatory treatment of PD.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO and Thomson Reuters's Web of Science were searched for clinical trials published between 2010 and 2018. We included all prospective experimental studies including randomized controlled trials (RCT) and other clinical trials with more than 10 patients.

RESULTS

Only 11 articles met the inclusion criteria, including 4 RCT, 3 open clinical trials and 5 comparative clinical trials. RCT demonstrated efficacy of transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) in only one of two trials. Neither pindolol nor d-fenfluramine were effective in blocking flumazenil-induced panic attacks. Augmentation with quetiapine was not superior to placebo. Open trials indicated that escitalopram, vortioxetine and TMS may be effective. Comparative trials did not demonstrate superiority from any drug, but confirmed tranylcypromine, paroxetine, clonazepam and alprazolam as effective options.

CONCLUSION

The current study confirmed the efficacy of tranylcypromine, paroxetine, clonazepam, alprazolam and escitalopram. Vortioxetine and TMS, with duration of 4 or more weeks, also seems to be effective. Quetiapine, pindolol and d-fenfluramine were not considered effective compounds.

Antidepressants versus placebo for panic disorder in adults

BACKGROUND

Panic disorder is characterised by repeated, unexpected panic attacks, which represent a discrete period of fear or anxiety that has a rapid onset, reaches a peak within 10 minutes, and in which at least four of 13 characteristic symptoms are experienced, including racing heart, chest pain, sweating, shaking, dizziness, flushing, stomach churning, faintness and breathlessness. It is common in the general population with a lifetime prevalence of 1% to 4%. The treatment of panic disorder includes psychological and pharmacological interventions. Amongst pharmacological agents, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) and the British Association for Psychopharmacology consider antidepressants, mainly selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), as the first-line treatment for panic disorder, due to their more favourable adverse effect profile over monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) and tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs). Several classes of antidepressants have been studied and compared, but it is still unclear which antidepressants have a more or less favourable profile in terms of effectiveness and acceptability in the treatment of this condition.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of antidepressants for panic disorder in adults, specifically:1. to determine the efficacy of antidepressants in alleviating symptoms of panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, in comparison to placebo;2. to review the acceptability of antidepressants in panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, in comparison with placebo; and3. to investigate the adverse effects of antidepressants in panic disorder, with or without agoraphobia, including the general prevalence of adverse effects, compared to placebo.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders' (CCMD) Specialised Register, and CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO up to May 2017. We handsearched reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All double-blind, randomised, controlled trials (RCTs) allocating adults with panic disorder to antidepressants or placebo.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a standard form. We entered data into Review Manager 5 using a double-check procedure. Information extracted included study characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention details and settings. Primary outcomes included failure to respond, measured by a range of response scales, and treatment acceptability, measured by total number of dropouts for any reason. Secondary outcomes included failure to remit, panic symptom scales, frequency of panic attacks, agoraphobia, general anxiety, depression, social functioning, quality of life and patient satisfaction, measured by various scales as defined in individual studies. We used GRADE to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome MAIN RESULTS: Forty-one unique RCTs including 9377 participants overall, of whom we included 8252 in the 49 placebo-controlled arms of interest (antidepressant as monotherapy and placebo alone) in this review. The majority of studies were of moderate to low quality due to inconsistency, imprecision and unclear risk of selection and performance bias.We found low-quality evidence that revealed a benefit for antidepressants as a group in comparison with placebo in terms of efficacy measured as failure to respond (risk ratio (RR) 0.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.66 to 0.79; participants = 6500; studies = 30). The magnitude of effect corresponds to a number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) of 7 (95% CI 6 to 9): that means seven people would need to be treated with antidepressants in order for one to benefit. We observed the same finding when classes of antidepressants were compared with placebo.Moderate-quality evidence suggested a benefit for antidepressants compared to placebo when looking at number of dropouts due to any cause (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.97; participants = 7850; studies = 30). The magnitude of effect corresponds to a NNTB of 27 (95% CI 17 to 105); treating 27 people will result in one person fewer dropping out. Considering antidepressant classes, TCAs showed a benefit over placebo, while for SSRIs and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRIs) we observed no difference.When looking at dropouts due to adverse effects, which can be considered as a measure of tolerability, we found moderate-quality evidence showing that antidepressants as a whole are less well tolerated than placebo. In particular, TCAs and SSRIs produced more dropouts due to adverse effects in comparison with placebo, while the confidence interval for SNRI, noradrenergic reuptake inhibitors (NRI) and other antidepressants were wide and included the possibility of no difference.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The identified studies comprehensively address the objectives of the present review.Based on these results, antidepressants may be more effective than placebo in treating panic disorder. Efficacy can be quantified as a NNTB of 7, implying that seven people need to be treated with antidepressants in order for one to benefit. Antidepressants may also have benefit in comparison with placebo in terms of number of dropouts, but a less favourable profile in terms of dropout due to adverse effects. However, the tolerability profile varied between different classes of antidepressants.The choice of whether antidepressants should be prescribed in clinical practice cannot be made on the basis of this review.Limitations in results include funding of some studies by pharmaceutical companies, and only assessing short-term outcomes.Data from the present review will be included in a network meta-analysis of psychopharmacological treatment in panic disorder, which will hopefully provide further useful information on this issue.

Effects of Aerobic Exercise on Anxiety Symptoms and Cortical Activity in Patients with Panic Disorder: A Pilot Study

BACKGROUND

The effects of the aerobic exercise on anxiety symptoms in patients with Panic Disorder (PD) remain unclear. Thus, the investigation of possible changes in EEG frontal asymmetry could contribute to understand the relationship among exercise, brain and anxiety.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the acute effects of aerobic exercise on the symptoms of anxiety and the chronic effects of aerobic exercise on severity and symptoms related to PD, besides the changes in EEG frontal asymmetry.

METHODS

Ten PD patients were divided into two groups, Exercise Group (EG; n=5) and Control Group (CG; n=5), in a randomized allocation. At baseline and post-intervention, they submitted the psychological evaluation through Panic Disorder Severity Scale (PDSS), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II), EEG frontal asymmetry, and maximal oxygen consumption (VO2max). On the second visit, the patients of EG being submitted to the aerobic exercise (treadmill, 25 minutes, and 50-55% of heart rate reserve) and the CG remained seated for the same period of time. Both groups submitted a psychological evaluation with Subjective Units of Distress Scale (SUDS) at baseline, immediately after (Post-0), and after 10 minutes of the rest pause (Post-10). The patients performed 12 sessions of aerobic exercise with 48-72 hours of interval between sessions.

RESULTS

In EG, SUDS increased immediately after exercise practice and showed chronic decrease in BAI and BDI-II as well as increased in VO2max (Post-intervention).

CONCLUSION

Aerobic exercise can promote increase in anxiety acutely and regular aerobic exercise promotes reduction in anxiety levels.

Benzodiazepines I: Upping the Care on Downers: The Evidence of Risks, Benefits and Alternatives

Benzodiazepines are some of the most commonly prescribed medications in the world. These sedative-hypnotics can provide rapid relief for symptoms like anxiety and insomnia, but are also linked to a variety of adverse effects (whether used long-term, short-term, or as needed). Many patients take benzodiazepines long-term without ever receiving evidence-based first-line treatments (e.g., psychotherapy, relaxation techniques, sleep hygiene education, serotonergic agents). This review discusses the risks and benefits of, and alternatives to benzodiazepines. We discuss evidence-based indications and contraindications, and the theoretical biopsychosocial bases for effectiveness, ineffectiveness and harm. Potential adverse effects and drug-drug interactions are summarized. Finally, both fast-acting/acute and delayed-action/chronic alternative treatments for anxiety and/or insomnia are discussed. Response to treatment-whether benzodiazepines, other pharmacological agents, or psychotherapy-should be determined based on functional recovery and not merely sedation.

Is the efficacy of antidepressants in panic disorder mediated by adverse events? A mediational analysis

It has been hypothesised that the perception of adverse events in placebo-controlled antidepressant clinical trials may induce patients to conclude that they have been randomized to the active arm of the trial, leading to the breaking of blind. This may enhance the expectancies for improvement and the therapeutic response. The main objective of this study is to test the hypothesis that the efficacy of antidepressants in panic disorder is mediated by the perception of adverse events. The present analysis is based on a systematic review of published and unpublished randomised trials comparing antidepressants with placebo for panic disorder. The Baron and Kenny approach was applied to investigate the mediational role of adverse events in the relationship between antidepressants treatment and efficacy. Fourteen placebo-controlled antidepressants trials were included in the analysis. We found that: (a) antidepressants treatment was significantly associated with better treatment response (ß = 0.127, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.21, p = 0.003); (b) antidepressants treatment was not associated with adverse events (ß = 0.094, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.24, p = 0.221); (c) adverse events were negatively associated with treatment response (ß = 0.035, 95% CI -0.06 to -0.05, p = 0.022). Finally, after adjustment for adverse events, the relationship between antidepressants treatment and treatment response remained statistically significant (ß = 0.122, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.23, p = 0.039). These findings do not support the hypothesis that the perception of adverse events in placebo-controlled antidepressant clinical trials may lead to the breaking of blind and to an artificial inflation of the efficacy measures. Based on these results, we argue that the moderate therapeutic effect of antidepressants in individuals with panic disorder is not an artefact, therefore reflecting a genuine effect that doctors can expect to replicate under real-world conditions.